Anyone know if this is true or not?

top 75 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[+] 386 points 1 year ago (44 children)
  • [–] 153 points 1 year ago (38 children)
  • [–] 166 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I don't want to come off as pedantic, but what we're dealing with in the US is a very strange and successful breed of "Christian Nationalism."

    Essentially, it's a belief that ultra-conservative Christianity is the only legitimate religion and that the USA is a Christian nation.

    It probably comes as no surprise that these people heavily influenced the Confederacy, is strongly white-supremecist, anti-vice, etc, and has been an anathema in this country since before the states actually formed.

    Christians themselves are... A problem, but not the problem. It's these Christian nationalists. They're loud. They want you to think all Christians believe what they do too. They also tend to drown out opposing Christian speakers by being louder than them too.

    It's one of the reasons why MLK Jr was hated so much by Hoover, by the south, etc. He was a Christian pastor, and stood against everything they did.

    It's important that we don't group Christians in with Christian Nationalists. It's very difficult but necessary.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Was it nationalists carrying out the crusades? Diddling kids? Demonizing LBGTQ? Seems like a convenient deflection.

    The existence of good does not justify the evil, and there has been way more harm than good in the name of gods, abrahamic or not.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • I do not dispute that. I am stating that this power grab is Christian Nationalism. If you read my comment, about half-way through I said Christians are a problem, but not the problem right now.

    I also would argue that MLK Jr. did much more good than any evil.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 21 points 1 year ago (10 children)
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    Right on man. Fuckin' Buddhists. Probably don't even use Linux.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago (4 children)
  • [–] 26 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    It’s almost as if it’s the nationalism part that makes them do that rather than having anything to do with their religion.

    Same with christianity, the core religion is somewhat fine, it’s the church and the people that used it as a tool that arent.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    “20 Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result, 21 but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property."

    Exodus 21:20-21

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (17 children)

    Painting with such a broad brush is how these people got to where they are now, don't make the same mistakes they did.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (14 children)

    Lmao thanks for the heads-up, past me.

    Edit: this user thinks that equal rights for women are Islamophobic.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago* (6 children)

    Wait, how do you get that? I also use Voyager, but not seeing that :/

    Edit: it’s called user tags. It’s not shared as far I’m concerned.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago* (5 children)

    Press and hold on any user and you can add a tag. It is incredibly useful for a myriad of reasons. I started implementing a system for sharing/community tags but I didn’t like the implications of having a parallel voting system to the existing one and scrapped it.

    Edit: the best part of the feature is that it can link you to why you created the tag. In this case the user in question argued that supporting women’s rights is the same thing as Islamophobia.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    Edit: Messed up a copy/paste.

    I couldn't find the exact context of what you linked, but down from it I saw your opinion, which I don't agree with, and doesn't say what you're claiming now.

    I honestly don’t understand what you’re asking of me. Women having equal rights is a binary thing, they either do or don’t.

    This is wrong. They can be equal in some parts and unequal in others. No culture gives identical rights to all other cultures. There are degrees to equality. It isn't all or nothing. I would say most of the west is more equal than countries that follow Islam as a state religion, but most of them don't have total equality. I assume you agree with that, right? And Saudi Arabia is better than Iran, right? Not significantly, but there are degrees to it, right?

    Painting it as binary all or nothing is wrong, and probably is antithetical to progress. If it's all or nothing, and something would take a step in the right direction, then why take that step if it isn't all the way, right? Treating it as binary is bad.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    What I gather from the linked conversation: (In regards to a joke where a boy turns out to have a polygamous dad)

    Sure, but that’s universal. Most of the Islamic theocratic have this problem, and it’s a point of general focus… but Islam is their excuse, not a functional cause. It’s not like Mormons did it any better.

    Islamic theocratics are not the same as muslims. Theocracy is where the law of one's god is seen as the ruling body, and tend to be more of the extremists of a religion - in Islam's case, the ones more likely to use religion as a weapon of power to have multiple wives. Nothing in that conversation came across as "Being pro-Islam is being anti-feminism".

    I'd also point out, the user made several efforts to ask for better explanation from those disagreeing, but everyone was just digging for more words from him instead of discussing openly. This is how disagreement is manufactured.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    It’s a consistent pattern of behavior from that person, which is why one thread might seem like people are overbearing. At some point you get sick of the disingenuous faux-intellectual “just asking questions”.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago

    You're claiming a pattern, but so far I've only been pointed to one example. On the other hand, the other participant in that conversation, you, has been posting giant screengrabs of this individual where they are claiming...that we shouldn't generalize evil groups?

    I'm all too aware of how people can "Sealion" the energy out of a discussion. But even your choice examples aren't painting yourself in the best light here, nor a very strong impression towards Zorque. I could yet be convinced, but not so far.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

    I should have been more specific. Probably the standard pig headed refusal to acknowledge a point 🤷‍♂️

    edit: yup that's exactly what it was. Their failed attempt to call me out is a reference to where I saw them refuse to acknowledge when they're wrong, or at least just keep it to themselves.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    You're flat out lying here. I oppose Trump's DC police action, and basically everything Trump has ever done or said. What I said, clearly, was that the Mayor of DC instituted the curfew - for a reason and months ago + extended it a few times - and it has nothing to do with Trump. Which the OP of that post was too lazy to know before posting and misleading people. Accuracy matters.

    All anyone has to do is search "dc curfew" to find nothing but articles about Muriel Bowser's curfew. You will find nothing about Trump.

    So yeah, you tend to earn the tag I gave you.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • There's a distinctive difference between american evangelists and other christian groups, for starters that the evangelists have been integrated in the state-religion the USA has been running at least since the cold war., and they are actively utilized by the Republicans. This also means that those evangelists believe that in the US white nationalists should be in power.

    Please note that the "christian" part in this has gone pretty far from any christian roots - it's for the most part just utilized to identify the in-group and to radicalize members. The quip "Y'all qaeda" comes pretty close to the truth - they are just as radical and socially regressive as any other islamic sect that would use terror to achieve their goals.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Its Republicans. Don’t blame the religion. Republicans want fascism and they want to control everyone's thoughts and behaviors because they're wired to be subservient to authoritarians. They hate that so many of us have a mind of our own.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    christians have been...

    A few closeted and bitter homosexuals in denial have been...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    This comment was reported as homophobic.

    I believe the meaning of the comment to be

    Republicans projecting - again

    Leaving it up for @Korkki@lemmy.ml to clarify.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 101 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Anthony Comstock.

    J. Edgar Hoover.

    Joseph McCarthy.

    Roy Cohn.

    Donald Trump.

    Willful traitors all. Have it writ upon thy meager graves, "destroyed the union just so people wouldn't masturbate."

    There's more, I know. But those fellas are all linked.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 90 points 1 year ago (11 children)

    I mean, I kind of guessed this way back when Collective Shout pushed their action.

    I actually had a comment removed here on Lemmy when I brought up how this was "US politics/elections affecting your life as gamers", because the mods insisted it was purely an Australian action, and my comment was off-topic. But we live in a global online world. There's no way that US politics wouldn't have a huge effect on this type of censorship.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [+] 67 points 1 year ago* (3 children)
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Conservatives HATE GAMING. Not the online chuds and 4channers who hate women, they're barely even conservatives...

    They sure sound like conservatives to me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago*

    Terminology is confusing. Lowercase-c conservatives want to keep the status quo as it is. But fact is that e.g. in the USA, legal access to abortion has been the status quo for 50 years.

    So nobody can say that the status quo has been anything but that in the US. So uppercase-C “Conservative” just means “reactionary” now, because that's what it is to roll back a 50 year old right.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 31 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    It is as it always was: Even if you have no interest in politics, the politics are interested in you.

    Ordinary people should adopt politics as a hobby, if only to have agency about which type of politics thrives or dies. I would much prefer sex-positive media to proliferate over sex negative, because the latter will take away my hentai games and manga. Furries, queers, and genuine perverts, all of them should have a shared interest of putting conservative values into a pine box, with a bit of stake and garlic.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • Furries, queers, and genuine perverts, all of them should have a shared interest of putting conservative values into a pine box, with a bit of stake and garlic.

    And facing towards the earth with their head decapitated and placed between their legs. Kudos in advance if you know what that means.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    The US is still the leader of the West, whatever its policies are, they will greatly affect the people in these countries.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 68 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Not surprised. stripe, PayPal, visa and Mastercard wouldn't just give up to millions of dollars in fees just because a small Australian group asked for it

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 133 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (10 children)

    So how does this tie into what's happening now? Part of Vought and Project 2025's plans are to remove Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA). This law currently protects platform holders, providing immunity for any content uploaded to said platform that third-party users created.

    By removing Section 230, platform holders, like Steam, would be liable for any "illegal" content uploaded to the platform, as opposed to those creating and uploading said content. If Steam were found guilty of hosting this content, the company could be hit with huge fines. Therefore, Steam, Itch, and many other platforms would likely place a blanket ban on any adult content, mitigating any risk of fines or other legal action. This, as pointed out on Reddit, would affect all forms of user-generated content, including fan art, mods, and videos, not just games themselves.

    Seems like a deceptive headline.

    The real takeaway is: Project 2025 guy also wants to do the platform-level censorship thing, but by removing legal protections (Section 230) instead of using payment processors.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] [S] 29 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Yeah I started to read comments on other sites and theres a LOT of speculation on this. But the actual article is pretty small. Thanks for breaking it down even further.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

    Why did you write the headline in big bold letters that looks like you state something as fact, then in small print at the bottom ask if it's true?

    You are the one that said it was true and you didn't know?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Hear me out: what if repealing section 230 would end up killing our social media monoculture, since it would be impossible for these platforms to operate. Instead, what if people had to host their content themselves, you know, like we did back in the day, when the Internet was fun.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago

    I don't know when you're talking about, but it probably wasn't self hosting, unless you're talking about like original internet stuff. GeoCities, for example, was not self-hosting. It was hosting your content on their platform.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago

    LLMs would be liable for every hallucination.

    But how do you enforce it? When the internet crashes out into millions of websites again? When the people who made it happen are the people bad ones and they only go after messaging they don’t like?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    The wild runaway success of Gmail proves that federation as a concept is currently not understood by the masses. I have lots of faith but little hope that more learning will be done on a large scale.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Yeah, the only way I see it happening is if it's done in a way that's invisible to users. Even then, I don't know if it's a good idea. Either you store a copy of all content locally or your content is only available when your server (presumably your computer or phone for most users) is online. Most people aren't going to have to storage space for self-hosting federated content that's distrubuted, and having people go down constantly from turning their computer off is far from ideal.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 46 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    The thing that's been bothering me is, since when did a local, "ragtag group" of activists have this much influence on the actions of massive corporations? Bigger, more powerful groups have tried and failed to make changes like this over and over again. Why does collective shout have so much pull? It doesn't make any sense to me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    This is quite literally the crux of the post: Who is actually making these decisions? Because there is, in fact, a zero percent chance that any number of Australian wokescolds would have leverage to force MASTERCARD AND VISA, the two global monopoly payment processors to change their practices just because the australians dont agree with the content of games.

    This is a top down decision coming from the owners of visa. Any attempt to backpedal this into the hands of some activist group is the most disrespectful patronizing I've seen in my entire life. I'm glad you and others are calling this shit out for the farce that it is.

    You mean to tell me the most successful activist movement in the last 50 years has been a single week protest lobbied at the most powerful capitalist institutions in the world, and the payment processors were bent over backwards for it? As if thats definitely not a giant, flaming red flag in itself?? It feels like the most obvious scapegoating of all time: a faceless Australian group nobody ever heard of before suddenly wrenched the arm of an economic lynchpin? No.

    Visa and Mastercard are doing this because this is what they want to do. No amount of protest would achieve this outcome save the literal socialist revolution at their doorstep. I dont care what any report says, this is top down. Visa is not exposed to any risk by any protest, it is laughable to suggest otherwise.

    With that out of the way, we can discuss the real matters of import: why are payment processors taking on the role of decency enforcement in global markets? What are their goals, who is making these decisions, and why is any government allowing these processors to dictate commerce within their borders unilaterally? Really and truly I dont even care about the games. I want names and faces of the people in charge of visa and Mastercard who are making these decisions, and I want them brought into a court room to clearly explain to everyone in the world what their exact reasoning is for caving to a historically insignificant protest. Stop killing games has been going simultaneously to this and, with millions of signatures, the response has been slander from the companies targeted. This collective shout bs is an absolute sham.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 45 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Not entirely surprising if true.

    Project 2025 goal is to spread their backwards ideology across the globe. They want to see the world burn.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    They think being cruel to minorities and women will make their lives better. Cause they're idiots. Or naive. Or hateful. Probably all of those, but that's speculation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago

    they dont want to make anyones lives better except their own. Pieces of shit like those have been bitter about any improvement to womens rights because they had it good being able to abuse women and want it back. Also minorities are good scapegoat for any problems they cause, so their rights have to go too or the whole thing collapses eventually as people might catch on who is really to blame.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›
    9 comments in c/politics@lemmy.world view that post